Posted on 12/19/2005 9:30:10 AM PST by new yorker 77
Edited on 12/19/2005 9:39:02 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
A paper trail is used to audit the vote. It could either be machine readable, human readable, or some combination of the two.
Is this a little slip of paper that the voter gets to show he voted, kind of like a receipt?
No. It will be deposited at the polling place just like regular paper ballots.
What if it does not reflect the voter's wishes? Does he go to the poll worker and have his vote deleted so he can revote?
If it doesn't reflect the voter's wishes, it would be handled similarly to the way that spoiled ballots are today. I would image in any well-designed electronic voting machine, a bad ballot would be able to be dealt with. The voter would probably have to sign that it was defective for whatever reason or something. In fact, a properly designed electronic system would display all of the voter's choices before printing. Perhaps it would be set up in such a way that after printing, it couldn't be second-guessed. This would be a problem though if you had paper feed problems, though paper fed through rolls jam much less often than sheet-fed paper.
One reason why you wouldn't want the voter to get a reciept for his vote is because it opens the door for verifiable fraud. Let's say Joe Democrat is offering $5 or whatever for votes for a candidate. If the voter got a reciept, Joe could demand the receipt (that he could check) before paying. Currently Joe Democrat can offer to pay for votes, but what the voter does in the booth is really his own choice. Personally, if I was offered something for a vote, I'd take it and then vote for the opponent.
Do we really want poll workers to be able to delete votes?
They can delete votes now with paper ballots. I believe a fair amount of this happened in Florida in the past couple of elections with the 'spoiled' ballots (overvotes mostly).
The same way you verify the authenticity of Lotto tickets. It isn't hard to produce an auditable paper trail. The easiest way is to produce a continuous tape of encrypted votes, using bar code technology, for each machine. The cost of the printer is negligible.
Why now should there be a paper trail for voting machines?
What about the mechanical voting machines we used in the past? No paper trail there.
The new electronic voting machines are more fraud proof than anything we have used in the past, including paper ballots.
You in essence have discovered why democrats want to return to paper balloting. Its much easier to fake a vote by punching a card in the backroom.
An electronic machine does what it's programmed to do. If it's programmed to spit out a billion votes for Hillary, it'll do so.
That's why paper verification is essential.
Nonsense. Producing fake paper votes requires a significant investment of effort, and a chance of getting caught, for each fraudulent vote. Fixing an electronic count requires less effort and risk to generate as many fake votes as desired.
I find it hard to believe that Diebold can't produce a machine capable of securely and accurately recording a vote tally. The Voting machine market is small potatoes compared to their business in the financial world. They have too much at stake to produce corruptible machines. This is all a Dem smokescreen.
That being said here is the Dem's fifth column in regards to voting IMHO:
A. Fight to the death for IDless voting as it allows multiple voting in Dem districts.
B. Paper is Essential!...Necessary votes can be gleefully generated weeks after the fact in the homes of Dem operatives while they enjoy "The Jerry Springer show" and "Oprah".
C. Tighten rules, mail out late, and discard as many military ballots as possible.
D. Push for Felonry Voting rights as they vote 90 percent Demorat.
Did I miss anything?
Try going to the inner city in a heavily democrat area. Many times the GOP can't even find a monitor to keep things on the up and up, but then they do they are subtly threatened. Then when it comes to actually deliver the votes, its packed into a van that is driven around the highway for hours and hours while special "vote technicians" press out fake votes. There was a great article in the WSJ (relating to the vast vote fraud in Philly) not too long ago in which someone admitted to taking part in this.
Same-old, same-old.
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.